• Our popular and beloved forums are finally back, after being down since April 2018 due to hosting and server issues. We have now switched to a better platform, while maintenaing all data as it was before (contents and user names) . Thank you for your patience and loyalty. If you have any questions, need to report an error, or are having trouble logging in, please email us at: assyrianvoice@rogers.com

Crusade against the Assyrian name

M

member 326969 Global

Guest
Neta1991 said:
Is then ancient assyrian history before neo Assyrian empire our history to?
Yes. That is precisely all I've been talking about.

Neta1991 said:
... Because the ancient Assyrians started to deport people in the Neo-Assyrian Empire, not before Neo-Assyrian Empire began.....And it was during the Neo-Assyrian Empire they were assyrianizied......
How does that affect the heritage and identity of Suryoye? I've demonstrated that Suryoye were always Assyrians (regardless of any Aramean admixture). Both Suryoye and Suraye descend from the Assyrians. The Akkadian-Sumerian population completely mixed with other populations including Arameans, yet it continued on through an "Assyrian" identity.
 

Joe25

New member
Neta1991 said:
Is then ancient assyrian history before neo Assyrian empire our history to? Because the ancient Assyrians started to deport people in the Neo-Assyrian Empire, not before Neo-Assyrian Empire began.....And it was during the Neo-Assyrian Empire they were assyrianizied......
A Oromoye/Ashuroye athin mu Akkad/Sumer, anaka kule hawin Suryoye.
 
M

member 326969 Global

Guest
Joe25 said:
A Oromoye/Ashuroye athin mu Akkad/Sumer, anaka kule hawin Suryoye.
Suryoye/Suraye also have substantial Hurrian and Aramean ancestry. There are many others but the Sumerians, Akkadians, Hurrians (including the Mitanni) and Arameans are our most prominent ancestors. Due to the deportation policies of Assyria, we have admixtures from many other races such as the Hebrews. The other races that our ancestors come from mixed were mostly Anatolian, Levantine, Caucasian, Elamite and Iranic.

I really want to emphasise that quote I listed before. It appears as a quote on Wikipedia at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyrian_continuity. It is originally from "Edessa: The Blessed City." by "JB Segal".

"Although the Assyrian empire had fell, the Assyrians retained the Assyrian culture alive. In his book "Edessa: The Blessed City" JB Segal confirms just that. Before Abgar Dynasty in Urhoy received Christianity, Urhoy was a city of Assyrian gods Nabu, Sin, Shamash, Ashur, Bel and Ishtar of Nineveh. Within the Abgar dynasty, there were kings named Mannu, the Akkadian name that was found in the Assyrian inscriptions from the assyrian city of Tushan(southeastern Turkey). This demonstrates that the people of Urhoy and in northern Mesopotamia retained its Assyrian identity and culture long after the Assyrian empire ceased to exist."

The above clearly shows that the Suryoyo (meaning "Assyrians") clearly worshiped the old Mesopotamian gods (namely of the Assyrian pantheon). "Mannu" is an ancient Akkadian name yet one of the Kings of Osroene (capital: Edessa) had that very traditional name. Osroene (including it's capital Edessa) sat in the heart of the Assyrian homeland.
 

Joe25

New member
Sharukinu said:
Suryoye/Suraye also have substantial Hurrian and Aramean ancestry. There are many others but the Sumerians, Akkadians, Hurrians (including the Mitanni) and Arameans are our most prominent ancestors. Due to the deportation policies of Assyria, we have admixtures from many other races such as the Hebrews. The other races that our ancestors come from mixed were mostly Anatolian, Levantine, Caucasian, Elamite and Iranic.

I really want to emphasise that quote I listed before. It appears as a quote on Wikipedia at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyrian_continuity. It is originally from "Edessa: The Blessed City." by "JB Segal".

"Although the Assyrian empire had fell, the Assyrians retained the Assyrian culture alive. In his book "Edessa: The Blessed City" JB Segal confirms just that. Before Abgar Dynasty in Urhoy received Christianity, Urhoy was a city of Assyrian gods Nabu, Sin, Shamash, Ashur, Bel and Ishtar of Nineveh. Within the Abgar dynasty, there were kings named Mannu, the Akkadian name that was found in the Assyrian inscriptions from the assyrian city of Tushan(southeastern Turkey). This demonstrates that the people of Urhoy and in northern Mesopotamia retained its Assyrian identity and culture long after the Assyrian empire ceased to exist."

The above clearly shows that the Suryoyo (meaning "Assyrians") clearly worshiped the old Mesopotamian gods (namely of the Assyrian pantheon). "Mannu" is an ancient Akkadian name yet one of the Kings of Osroene (capital: Edessa) had that very traditional name. Osroene (including it's capital Edessa) sat in the heart of the Assyrian homeland.
Indeed, that's why Assyrians come in all kinds of looks, shapes and colors. But since those deportation policies from the ancient empire were such a long time ago we've been isolated and stayed homogeneous for so long that we've become our own regardless, as DNA studies show our unique genetics.
 

Neta1991

New member
Sharukinu said:
Suryoye/Suraye also have substantial Hurrian and Aramean ancestry. There are many others but the Sumerians, Akkadians, Hurrians (including the Mitanni) and Arameans are our most prominent ancestors. Due to the deportation policies of Assyria, we have admixtures from many other races such as the Hebrews. The other races that our ancestors come from mixed were mostly Anatolian, Levantine, Caucasian, Elamite and Iranic.

I really want to emphasise that quote I listed before. It appears as a quote on Wikipedia at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyrian_continuity. It is originally from "Edessa: The Blessed City." by "JB Segal".

"Although the Assyrian empire had fell, the Assyrians retained the Assyrian culture alive. In his book "Edessa: The Blessed City" JB Segal confirms just that. Before Abgar Dynasty in Urhoy received Christianity, Urhoy was a city of Assyrian gods Nabu, Sin, Shamash, Ashur, Bel and Ishtar of Nineveh. Within the Abgar dynasty, there were kings named Mannu, the Akkadian name that was found in the Assyrian inscriptions from the assyrian city of Tushan(southeastern Turkey). This demonstrates that the people of Urhoy and in northern Mesopotamia retained its Assyrian identity and culture long after the Assyrian empire ceased to exist."

The above clearly shows that the Suryoyo (meaning "Assyrians") clearly worshiped the old Mesopotamian gods (namely of the Assyrian pantheon). "Mannu" is an ancient Akkadian name yet one of the Kings of Osroene (capital: Edessa) had that very traditional name. Osroene (including it's capital Edessa) sat in the heart of the Assyrian homeland.
Dont you think that its weird that l who believed l was Aramean now say l am assyrian? Are the wanna be arameans stupid? Dont they know what you said to me? To tell you the truth l have thought that l was aramean for many years, or maybe always, until today, now l say l am assyrian. I have in my facebook reject the syriac Aramean flag and replaced it with the assyrian, chaldean and syriac flag which we should use to be united under the assyrian name. https://www.google.se/search?q=assyrian+syriac+flag+united&client=ms-android-sonymobile&prmd=inv&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjJ4JLBobDNAhUEWCwKHVmPBvcQ_AUIBygB&biw=360&bih=512#imgrc=0wAN5dERQJ9OaM%3A

Check it out, l found it today, it represent Assyrian, Aramaean and chaldeans united.

We are assyrians,  mixed with many people because the ancient neo assyrians wanted them to be assyrians.

I will support the Assyrian name and you in the end convinced me and l am happy that my name comes from the bible and assyrians, my name is Nemrud(Nimrod).
 

Neta1991

New member
For maybe 4-5 days l have searched after information and compared the evidence of both the Assyrian and Aramean side and talking to you, and l finally know who my ancestors were!
 
M

member 326969 Global

Guest
Neta1991 said:
Dont you think that its weird that l who believed l was Aramean now say l am assyrian? Are the wanna be arameans stupid? Dont they know what you said to me? To tell you the truth l have thought that l was aramean for many years, or maybe always, until today, now l say l am assyrian. I have in my facebook reject the syriac Aramean flag and replaced it with the assyrian, chaldean and syriac flag which we should use to be united under the assyrian name. https://www.google.se/search?q=assyrian+syriac+flag+united&client=ms-android-sonymobile&prmd=inv&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjJ4JLBobDNAhUEWCwKHVmPBvcQ_AUIBygB&biw=360&bih=512#imgrc=0wAN5dERQJ9OaM%3A

Check it out, l found it today, it represent Assyrian, Aramaean and chaldeans united.

We are assyrians,  mixed with many people because the ancient neo assyrians wanted them to be assyrians.

I will support the Assyrian name and you in the end convinced me and l am happy that my name comes from the bible and assyrians, my name is Nemrud(Nimrod).
Although the flag looks nice, it's just another unnecessary variation of the Assyrian flag. The "Chadlean" flag is just a rendition of the Assyrian flag. The "Aramean" flag is purely based on a relief that depicted Assyrian mythology.

The Aramean flag was based on an ancient Assyrian solar disk being supported by Gilgamesh and two bull-men. Assyrianised Arameans were the only Arameanss who had Gilgamesh as a part of their mythology. The following photo is of the relief that the "Aramean" flag was based on. It dates to the 9th century BC, and it was discovered in Tell-Halaf. Tell-Halaf lies between modern Al Hasakah and Sanliurfa (Edessa/ Beyt Urhai) in northeastern Syria, in the heart of the Assyrian homeland.

The actual thing: https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/39/51/84/39518451a6460332d55b463025196789.jpg

A replica: http://imgc.allpostersimages.com/images/P-473-488-90/13/1348/DVCS000Z/posters/relief-depicting-gilgamesh-between-two-bull-men-supporting-a-winged-sun-disk-fr-tell-halaf-syria.jpg


These quasi-Assyrian flags all derive from the Assyrian one. They cause division and all represent the Assyrian tradition, despite that they are culturally appropriated to establish baseless non-Assyrian identities.


Neta1991 said:
For maybe 4-5 days l have searched after information and compared the evidence of both the Assyrian and Aramean side and talking to you, and l finally know who my ancestors were!
I'm glad you investigated as apposed to blending in with the whim of the crowd.
 

Neta1991

New member
Sharukinu, can you please explain why our forefathers used the word othoroyo(Assyrian) and suryoyo as synonym for thousands of years when they could just use the word othoroyo(Assyrian) , when talking about themselves?
 
M

member 326969 Global

Guest
Neta1991 said:
Sharukinu, can you please explain why our forefathers used the word othoroyo(Assyrian) and suryoyo as synonym for thousands of years when they could just use the word othoroyo(Assyrian) , when talking about themselves?
What I said earlier (quoted below) best answers your question.

" The following is a very enlightening treatise by Simo Parpola that covers parts of what we're talking about; section 3.1 specifically relates much to what I'm saying: http://mail.jaas.org/edocs/v18n2/Parpola-identity_Article%20-Final.pdf "

To summarise, languages constantly evolve, and there were a lot of sound shifts and new variations of words being created over the thousands of years it has been since the word "Ashur" was first uttered. All of the variants, "Athuraya, Aturaya, Othuroyo, Suraya, Suryoyo" etc all evolved out of the word "Ashur".

Firstly, "Ashurayu" produced a variant called "Athurayu" although "Ashurayu" was still used. In the aforementioned treatise, Simo Parpola says that the "Athurayu" variant was most likely coined by Arameans in the 12th Century BC. Then later the Aramean influence changed "Athur" to have a long "a" sound ie "Aathur" instead of "Uttour". As Simo Parpola explained, many unstressed vowels in Neo-Assyrian (Akkadian) were dropped if they were at the beginning of a word. Since the "Athurayu" variant changed to having a stressed "A" ("aathurayu"), the "a" remained at the beginning of the word.
          So now I've explained why we have two variants, "Ashurayu" and "Aathurayu".  Due to another shift in pronunciation, another variant evolved from the word "Ashurayu"which was, "Assurayu". By following that sound shift I just mentioned, it was reduced to a new word "Surayu" becasue it started with an unstressed "A" sound.

In the Neo-Assyrian Empire, the terms were used kind of like how we can pronounce the word "either" as  "eether" or "aither". You may also like to think of them as being related like the words "iterate" and "reiterate" which both mean the same thing and share the same origin. Also, the ancient Assyrians came into contact with various people and indeed incorporated many different people into their society which resulted in the adoption of many loanwords, the creation many new words in general (neologisms) and shifts in pronunciation, dialects, accents, etc.

If your wondering why it didn't get standardised by the usage of one name, we haven't been unified for over 2600 years. Besides, even during the Neo-Assyrian Empire, there were several synonymous names for Assyria/Assyrians already in usage. There is no law of nature preventing languages from creating variety; if anything, it's the opposite. Various synonymous names have popped up for many cultures; take the various names that have used to describe a man of Norse heritage, such as "Northman, Nortman, Nordman, Norman, Norseman, Nord, etc". Considering our situation since the fall of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, we're lucky it hasn't cut up into many more variants than it already has. Up until 500 years ago (when the Chaldean identity was introduced), regardless of the terms in usage, there were only two groups of Assyrians being the East Assyrians (Suraye) and the West Assyrians (Suryoye) -that of course is if we exclude other groups that might have much Assyrian genetics (such as Iraqi Jews) but espouse a different identity.
 

Neta1991

New member
One more thing l am wondering is if we called ourselves suryoye othoroye then why say Assyrian two times, if both word meant assyrian?
 
M

member 326969 Global

Guest
Neta1991 said:
One more thing l am wondering is if we called ourselves suryoye othoroye then why say Assyrian two times, if both word meant assyrian?
People seemed to have confused what the terms mean. Everyone you ask has their own definition. Some erroneously say "Othuroyo" means "Assyrian" whereas "Suraya/Suryoyo" means "Syriac" (despite that "Syriac" refers to the Assyrians after they developed the Syriac language). Others say the difference depends on your religious sect.  Some might be using the terms side-by-side and interchangeably to emphasise that there is no difference between the terms.

Whatever they might think, it doesn't change the established facts that the terms have a common root, and the people who use them have a common ancestral root being the citizens of the Neo-Assyrian Empire who self-identified as Assyrians even after the collapse of their state. Those same people even kept worshiping the Assyrian gods and used the Assyrian languages (Akkadain and Aramaic dialects) after they became stateless. It was they and their descendants who had all these terms in usage.

There could be so many reasons as to why there is a confusion between terms. We already know that "Suraya" and "Athuraya" mean the same thing. For example, imagine all tribes preserved the name "Suraya" but only one tribe preserve the name "Athuraya" as well. They might often call themselves "Athuraye" but see themselves no different from the other tribes who call themselves "Suraye". In such a case, it is easy to imagine people from that tribe identifying as "Suraye Athuraye". It's all ridiculous anyway, they all mean the same thing. If people chose for these terms to mean specific things, they will only divide the nation further.
 

Neta1991

New member
Are suryoyo, chaldean and suryaya languages related? Its hard to understand eachother, meaning members of the nestorian church, chaldean church and syriac orthodox church.
 
M

member 326969 Global

Guest
Neta1991 said:
Are suryoyo, chaldean and suryaya languages related? Its hard to understand eachother, meaning members of the nestorian church, chaldean church and syriac orthodox church.
All of our languages have a common ancestry. All of our ancestors have a common ancestry. The word "Chaldean" is misleading. "Chaldean"-Catholic Assyrians are East Assyrians ("Suraye") and speak Eastern Neo-Syriac (Surit/Surith) like any other East Assyrian. "Chaldean"-Catholic East Assyrians have been separated from non-Catholic East Assyrians for less than 500 years which has resulted in a very slightly different sub-dialect or accent, but it is still the same thing (like American English and British English). All East Assyrians (including "Chaldean"-Catholics) share the same lexicon, grammar etc. I had Chaldean neighbours and it took me a while to realise they were Chaldean despite that I spoke with them on several occasions by then. We do tend to have some differences, but we are each a combination of several sub-dialects of Eastern Neo-Syriac.

Every tribe has it's own sort of sub-dialect (with minor variation). Imagine half of the tribes converted to Catholicism while the other half didn't. So for example, on the one hand, there are Assyrian dialects A,B and C, and on the other hand, there are Assyrian dialects D,E and F.  Over time, as A,B and C stick together, they start to borrow from each other and they blend together. D,E and F do the same of themselves. Eventually it seems like they are two separate dialects (Chaldean-Catholic vs non-Catholic) but they are each just two groups of many tribes that have stuck very close to those who share their religion. The dialect difference is very artificial, they are both just flavours of Surith (with a very slightly different vocabulary).

The Suryoyo/Suroyo variety of Syriac is more different becasue they are a cluster of various dialects that have been fairly separated from much interaction with the Suraya variety of Syriac for about a couple thousand years. They are still both very closely related to each other despite the poor mutual intelligibility between spoken Eastern Neo-Syriac and spoken Western Neo-Syriac; the written differences are far less.


Whatever the West Assyrians speak, and whatever and East Assyrians speak (non-Catholics and Chaldean-Catholics), all descend from what was spoken by Assyrians in the Neo-Assyrian Empire. For some time after losing our sovereignty, the dialect of Edessa (Beyt Urhai) greatly influenced all Assyrians, helping to close the gap between all the regional dialects that were drifting apart. Unfortunately, there is still a big gap we need to close.

We need to standardise our language. We need a new language that incorporates the best features of all the dialects of Neo-Syriac. I would strongly recommend borrowing from the languages of our most prominent ancestors to perfect that language; those ancestors being Akkadians, Hurrians, Arameans and Sumerians. The languages of some of our other ancestors may be resourceful but I feel as though those aforementioned languages are more than enough, and they best reflect our identity.
 

ins001

New member
Sharukinu said:
I would strongly recommend borrowing from the languages of our most prominent ancestors to perfect that language; those ancestors being Akkadians, Hurrians, Arameans and Sumerians. The languages of some of our other ancestors may be resourceful but I feel as though those aforementioned languages are more than enough, and they best reflect our identity.
Sounds like a good idea.
And who else "our other ancestors"?
 

Neta1991

New member
Sharukinu, are we suryoye, suryaya, nestorian church, syriac orthodox church and chaldean church talking eastern aramaic which was the language of the ancient assyrians in the ancient neo Assyrian empire? or is it called east aramaic, not sure, maybe u could help?
 
M

member 326969 Global

Guest
ins001 said:
Sounds like a good idea.
And who else "our other ancestors"?
I'm very passionate about seeing/making this happen.

We have heaps of ancestors from different societies. If one examines the Assyrianisation and deportation policies that Assyria applied against it's subjects, he will find that the populations of the Middle East were shuffled around quite a lot. The Hebrews are known for having two states, Israel and Judah, both of which were conquered by the Akkadian states, Assyria and Babylonia respectively. The Israelites (sometimes referred to as 10 of the 12 Hebrew tribes of the Bible) were deported from their homeland and completely Assyrianised (with at least most of them believed to have been taken straight to the Assyrian capital or it's surrounds).

The Jews (the people of Judah, sometimes regarded as 2 of the 12 Hebrew tribes of the Bible) were taken to Babylon where they later split into two groups, the Jews who stayed in Babylon and the ones who migrated back to their Levantine homeland. All the Jews that we know of today are descended from the Jews who migrated back to the Levant, except for Iraqi Jews and Iranian Jews (and any other similar groups if I've failed to mention them).
          It is the Iraqi Jews and the Iranian Jews who descend from the Jews who remained in Babylon, and of the Assyrians who converted to Judaism after the Babylonian Jews migrated north to live with Assyrians. Their Assyrian heritage is why the speak Northern Neo-Aramaic as all Assyrians do. By that same token, they could fairly be regarded as Assyrian Jews for speaking NENA, and because non-Jewish Assyrians are genetically the closest population related to Iraqi Jews (alongside Iranian Jews who are just as closely related).

Now, all of that is just one example. The Assyrian governments of antiquity subjugated and Assryianised countless other peoples, and did so at rapid speeds. It was not uncommon for conquered peoples to strictly use only Assyrian names for the first generation following conquest. Of course, we are the descendants of both the winners and losers of many wars that Assyria was involved in.

Keep in mind that Assyrians often deported talented people to the heart of the homeland; that means scholars, physicians, engineers, military experts, musicians etc. As a non-exhaustive list, and of the ones that I can think of, here are some other peoples that were at least partially if not completely absorbed into the Assyrian population either by deportation, immigration, warfare, purely by annexation or by mixing with Assyrians after the loss of Assyrian sovereignty:

-Caucasus and Anatolia: Urartians (closely related to Hurrians), Mitanni (who were Hurrians too), Hittites (and Hatti), Luwians (who were an off-shoot of the Hittites), Armenians, Cimmerians, Scythians,

-"Eber-Nari" (Akkadain for "Transeuphratia"; the Levant up until Mesopotamia): Amorites, Canaanites, Phoenecians (off-shoot of Canaanites), Hebrews (off-shoot of Canaanites)

-Iranian Plateau (all of the following are non-Iranian peoples; the following might have also been absorbed into Iranian societies): Elamites (musicians were famously deported to Assyria), Kassites, Mannaeans, Gutians

-Iranian Plateu (Iranian peoples): Persians (and Sassanids), Parthians, Medes

-Mesopotamia: Chaldeans (who quickly assimilated into Akkadian society upon immigrating to southern Mesopotamia)

-Africa and Saudi Peninsula: ethnic Egyptians (following Esarhaddon's conquest of Egypt, all blacks in Egypt were removed from Egypt and the Neo-Assyrian Empire; talented non-black Egyptians were deported to Assyria) (much later on, it is also possible that the loyalist Egyptian troops who stood shoulder to shoulder and fought to the very end on the side of Assyria, would have mixed with Assyrians -much more likely with West Assyrians)

-Europe: Greeks, Romans


The most prominent of our ancestors, the Sumerians, Akkadians, Arameans and Hurrians, were not only massive contributors to our gene pool, but they were the most significant Mesopotamian peoples, have contributed much to our identity and culture, and they're fairly unique to our people aside from the fair possibility that West Aramaic speakers (such as the people of Ma'loula) share a large portion of Aramean ancestry with Assyrians (Suryoye/Suraye). To which extent were those West Aramaic speakers Assyrianised is questionable, I don't know if they share our genetic dynamics. What is certain is that all speakers of Western Neo-Syriac (Suryoye) and Eastern Neo-Syriac (Suraye) are Assyrians. If Western Neo-Aramaic speakers wish to adopt an Assyrian identity to coalesce with Suryoye/Suraye, I don't find any good cause to deny them.



Neta1991 said:
Sharukinu, are we suryoye, suryaya, nestorian church, syriac orthodox church and chaldean church talking eastern aramaic which was the language of the ancient assyrians in the ancient neo Assyrian empire? or is it called east aramaic, not sure, maybe u could help?
I've already answered this on the last page; ordered from left to right, I've listed the most general groups to the most specific:

" Neo-Aramaic -> Western Neo-Aramaic (spoken by the people of Ma'loula for example)
  Neo-Aramaic -> Northern Neo-Aramaic -> Northeastern Neo-Aramaic -> Eastern Neo-Syriac (spoken by East Assyrians; spoken by Urmians for example)
  Neo-Aramaic -> Northern Neo-Aramaic -> Northwestern Neo-Aramaic -> Western Neo-Syriac (spoken by West Assyrians; spoken by Turoyo for example) "
 

Neta1991

New member
Sharukinu, so all suryoyo and suryaya, nestorians, Chaldeans, syiac orthodox church languages come from what was spoken in the neo assyrian empire (900-600 bc).
There is something l am wondering, do you say that the sumerians, akkadians, hurrians, Aramaeans and all that is written here are our ancestors: Who are the Assyrians? Simply put, the modern-day Assyrians are Semitic people, and the direct descendants of the ancient Assyrian and Babylonian people, including their predecessors the Akkadians and Sumerians, and have a history spanning over 6760 years.

Why do we have so many ancestors,  why cant we just be descendants of the ancient assyrians? Is it because the assyrians mixed with other people?

When you say "the assyrians" you are talking about the assyrians of early period, old assyrian empire, middle Assyrian empire, neo assyrian empire and until modern Assyrians,  being suryoyo/suryaya, syriac orthodox church,  nestorians,  Chaldeans etc? According to wikipedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyria

That is the Assyrians you are talking about? And that Assyrians are our ancestors?


During the Akkadian Empire (2334?2154 BC), the Assyrians, like all the Mesopotamian Semites (and also the Sumerians), became subject to the dynasty of the city state of Akkad, centered in central Mesopotamia. The Akkadian Empire founded by Sargon the Great claimed to encompass the surrounding "four quarters".
 

Joe25

New member
Neta I don't mean any offense but you have already asked some of these questions before and imo they were answered effectively. I just feel like we're not reaching any sort of closure or conclusion here although it's understandable because it's a vast subject and our biggest debate. Can I ask you though, how far have you come so far in accepting Assyrianism, from before you came here up to right now?
 
M

member 326969 Global

Guest
Neta1991 said:
Sharukinu, so all suryoyo and suryaya, nestorians, Chaldeans, syiac orthodox church languages come from what was spoken in the neo assyrian empire (900-600 bc).
Yes. Even after this period, the dialect of Edessa influenced all of our similar dialects. It was around the time of Jesus that in Edessa (Beyt Urhai), the "Syriac" dialect of Assyrian Aramaic was born.


Neta1991 said:
There is something l am wondering, do you say that the sumerians, akkadians, hurrians, Aramaeans and all that is written here are our ancestors: Who are the Assyrians?
The Sumerians and Akkadians coalesced to form one people referred to as Akkadians. Over time, the Akkadians developed two slightly different dialects and cultures, the Assyrian one to the north, and the Babylonian one to the south. Hurrians were assimilated by Assyrians over time.

As I just discussed, many other people eventually became incorporated into Assyrian society; the Arameans having a significant impact.


Neta1991 said:
Simply put, the modern-day Assyrians are Semitic people, and the direct descendants of the ancient Assyrian and Babylonian people, including their predecessors the Akkadians and Sumerians, and have a history spanning over 6760 years.
Assyrians and Babylonians were already very similar. They had the same culture and language and referred to it as "Akkadian", not "Assyrian nor "Babylonian". Despite that they both had only one name for their language, modern linguists make a distinction by referring to their slightly different dialects as "Assyrian" or "Babylonian" accordingly.

Even when the citizens of Babylon were deported in the Seleucid Empire, the only place that any of them could maintain their Mesopotamian identity was in the company of their Assyrian countrymen to the north. Any Babylonians that settled elsewhere would have ultimately dissolved into other populations, and not maintained their own culture or identity.


Neta1991 said:
Why do we have so many ancestors,  why cant we just be descendants of the ancient assyrians? Is it because the assyrians mixed with other people?
We do call ourselves Assyrians. The history of Assyrians is quite complex, and Assyrians have diverse origins.


Neta1991 said:
When you say "the assyrians" you are talking about the assyrians of early period, old assyrian empire, middle Assyrian empire, neo assyrian empire and until modern Assyrians,  being suryoyo/suryaya, syriac orthodox church,  nestorians,  Chaldeans etc? According to wikipedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyria

That is the Assyrians you are talking about? And that Assyrians are our ancestors?
They are all Assyrians. The contexts determined which Assyrians of which time frame I was referring to.


Neta1991 said:
During the Akkadian Empire (2334?2154 BC), the Assyrians, like all the Mesopotamian Semites (and also the Sumerians), became subject to the dynasty of the city state of Akkad, centered in central Mesopotamia. The Akkadian Empire founded by Sargon the Great claimed to encompass the surrounding "four quarters".
" During the Akkadian Empire (2334?2154 BC), the Assyrians, like all the Mesopotamian Semites (and also the Sumerians), became subject to the dynasty of the city state of Akkad, centered in central Mesopotamia. The Akkadian Empire founded by Sargon the Great claimed to encompass the surrounding "four quarters". "

This above statement means that during the Akkadian Empire, the city of Akkad served as the home of a lineage of monarchs that ruled over the area of Assyria. This is all still purely in a context of Akkadain/Sumerian civilisation. It just means that one city state (Akkad) ruled over the others (including the city of Ashur). They referred to the inhabitants of the city of Ashur as "Assyrians". This is like saying the royal family of "Washington, D.C. ruled over New Yorkers". Now imagine that later in time, the USA becomes known as the "New York Empire". To make this even less significant, this all started happening early on in Mesopotamian history before the Sumerians and Akkadians completely blended together. Although Akkadains referred to people living in a particular region as "Assyrians", they were referring to either Sumerians or Akkadians from that specific area (not a new type of people). Much later in time, this area became the home of a mixed Sumerian-Akkadian group (Assyrians) that spoke slightly differently to the mixed Sumerian-Akkadian group in the south (Babylonians).
 

Neta1991

New member
Joe25 said:
Neta I don't mean any offense but you have already asked some of these questions before and imo they were answered effectively. I just feel like we're not reaching any sort of closure or conclusion here although it's understandable because it's a vast subject and our biggest debate. Can I ask you though, how far have you come so far in accepting Assyrianism, from before you came here up to right now?
Haha,  l have already accepted it. There is just somethings about our history that l dont like.

Sharukinu, what l dont like that we say we are descendants of the Sumerians and akkadians and hurrians and Arameans and the real assyrians etc is because when l read about Assyrian history from old assyrian empire to neo assyrian empire,  its like read that "the assyrians conquered the arameans(also being assyrian, our ancestors)  and they conquered the babylonians(also assyrians, our ancestors) and the hurrians(our ancestors) , akkadians(our ancestors) ,  sumerians(our ancestors),l mean which is my real history! I cant read all of the other peoples history and say its my history, meaning sumerian, Akkadian, Babylonian, Aramaean etc, choose one history for god sake. Is it possible that we call ourselves assyrians and claiming the assyrian history from early period, old assyrian empire to neo assyrian empire?  That being our real history even though we mixed with other people, and they became assyrians? I sometimes call my self swedish because l was born in Sweden and claiming the swedish history as my history also, and assyrian history ofcourse, even though swedish people became mixed with other people in scandinavia.

Is it possible that this Assyrian history is our real history https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyria?
Sharukinu, l hope you understand what l am talking about.
 
Top